Health Committee on June 13th, 2006

[The Chair, Conservative, Rob Merrifield]

Let's go on to the second motion.

Madame Demers.

[Nicole Demers, Bloc, Laval, QC]

Mr. Chairman, this motion aims to tighten conditions for the Special Access Program for Medical Devices. We've noted that Health Canada and program administrators have eased up on restrictions since the program's inception in 1993. While only 17 requests for silicone gel implants were approved in 1993 and 1994, a total of 8,53 requests were approved in 2005-2006. A program developed to help special cases is now becoming a program accessed for breast augmentations in 80 per cent of the cases, not breast reconstructions, as originally intended.

Mr. Chairman, we are asking the Minister of Health to tighten eligibility conditions for the Special Access Program for Medical Devices by allowing surgeons to obtain silicone gel implants only for post-cancer breast reconstructions. I would also be willing to allow surgeons to use these implants for reconstructive surgery related to specific deformities.

[The Chair, Conservative, Rob Merrifield]

Are you making an amendment to your motion?

[Nicole Demers, Bloc, Laval, QC]

Before we debate the motion, I'm prepared to add that stipulation. Some women have certain deformities. In such instances, the use of silicone gel breast implants could be acceptable.

[The Chair, Conservative, Rob Merrifield]

We need the exact wording of the motion. Could it be “other disfiguring conditions”?

[Nicole Demers, Bloc, Laval, QC]

Yes.

[The Chair, Conservative, Rob Merrifield]

Or “disfiguring conditions”?

[Nicole Demers, Bloc, Laval, QC]

Mr. Chairman, I don't know what the correct term would be, but I wanted to make this point before we started debating the motion, because some found this upsetting.

[The Chair, Conservative, Rob Merrifield]

We'll have to express it before we move it; that's the dilemma I'm in.

[Nicole Demers, Bloc, Laval, QC]

Mr. Chairman, I will table my motion as is. Perhaps someone will want to move an amendment. The last paragraph reads as follows:

We are asking the Minister of Health to tighten the conditions for the Special Access Program by allowing surgeons to obtain silicone gel implants only for post-cancer breast reconstructions.

[The Chair, Conservative, Rob Merrifield]

Okay. The motion is as it is. We'll open the floor to debate; we may get an amendment to it.

Ms. Dhalla.

[Ruby Dhalla, Liberal, Brampton—Springdale, ON]

While I support what Madame Demers is trying to accomplish here, I just have a little bit of trouble with the last paragraph in her motion, which states that we're asking the Minister of Health to tighten the conditions of the special access program by allowing surgeons to obtain silicone gel implants only for post-cancer breast reconstructions.

I wouldn't feel comfortable overriding the diagnosis that a surgeon would put forward. I think we need to make an amendment in regard to that, to broaden it a little bit, and not be seen as overriding the judgment of a surgeon who specializes in that area. Perhaps we could say, “to obtain silicone gel implants for other than breast augmentations”.

[The Chair, Conservative, Rob Merrifield]

Is this your amendment? What is the amendment?

[Ruby Dhalla, Liberal, Brampton—Springdale, ON]

I think we want to get the wording. We want something to say it's for other than breast augmentation.

[The Chair, Conservative, Rob Merrifield]

Do you have the wording?

[Sonya Norris, Committee Researcher]

The regulations currently state that their application has to indicate a diagnosis, a treatment, or a prevention. They don't actually ask for that in the application form currently; they ask for the medical condition.

[Ruby Dhalla, Liberal, Brampton—Springdale, ON]

The wording is “medical condition”, right?

[Sonya Norris]

And it should be “diagnosis, treatment, or prevention”.

[The Chair, Conservative, Rob Merrifield]

I'm just looking for wording. I'm getting my technical hat on.

John.

[John Maloney, Liberal, Welland, ON]

Would the word “therapeutic” fit?

[The Chair, Conservative, Rob Merrifield]

Ms. Dhalla, this is your amendment. Can you come up with a definite amendment? Then we will debate that amendment.

[Steven Fletcher, Conservative, Charleswood—St. James—Assiniboia, MB]

Ms. Dhalla, why don't we say...that only while consulting with a physician can they have these gel implants?

[Ruby Dhalla, Liberal, Brampton—Springdale, ON]

But to go to a surgeon, they would have been referred by a physician in the first place. You can't just go directly to any surgeon.

[The Chair, Conservative, Rob Merrifield]

Okay, while you guys wrestle with that, I'll have Ms. Priddy take the floor.

[Penny Priddy, NDP, Surrey North, BC]

I want to go back to the wording you just used, Sonya. Where did that come from--“diagnosis, treatment, and prevention”? Some people do this for prevention, for familial breast cancer.